Richmond dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1884-1903, 1887-08-31

1B the ttatthhchs VI TIE gfuDd Jury nr w
who the witnesses were upon whose tes-
timony the indictment was found, and
that statement of the grand Jury Is that
the Indictment was found upon the tes-
timony of only j. V. Ryals and w. w.
Womack, and the case all the way
through bears the ear-marks, il I may
use the expression, Of j. V. Ryals
as the leading prosecuting witness
and spirit in this whole matter.
| have in my possession quite a
number OF letters from Mr.. Ryals TO
Mr.. Skiles covering several years OF
time Immediately after the transaction
complained OF was had. In one OF
these letters, the date OF which is un-
fortunately not given, but which was
evidently written long after the trans
action, Mr.. Ryals states that J. D..
Ryals. who had been sent out TO Colo
rado TO take charge of this property
and work upon it, as stated by the
Commonwealth's Attorney, reported
that he had done all the work necessary
to hold their title for another year. and
that they were well pleased with the
property that it improved as they
worked upon it, and that it wonld not
be necessary to expend any more
money in order to perfect their title to
the claim and make the property pay
ing investment. Throughout these
letters, covering long period of time,
illusions are now and then made to
this property, always expressing entire
satisfaction with it, and never in a
single instance making any kind OF
complaint whatever, and in addition
they abound in expressions of affection,
regard, and esteem for Mr.. Skiles.
All this, coupled with the facts to
which ] have already called your at
tention-viz., that subsequently Mrs.
Ryals, Skiles's daughter, sued for and
obtained divorce from Ryals for cruel
and abusive treatment, his debarment
by the co1rts OF Colorado, and the fur
ther fact that for six years no complaint
of any kind was made against Mr..
Skies and no demand whatever made
upon him on account of this transac-
tion-had the effect to cause me at the
outset to think that / was justified, be-
cause of its lack OF merit, in taking
the action j did in the case and mas
much as none of these matters have
been refuted, and no one, not even the
prosecuting attorney, has seen fit to
take any notice of them, although |
have submitted a statement in regard
to them to you, which you probably
forwarded to him, / remain Of the same
opinion as to the facts OF the case that
/ have from the first entertained.
SO far as the other transactions are
concerned, to which the prosecuting
attorney refers in his letter, am in
formed that Mr.. Skiles had nothing
whetever to do with them, but however
that may be, they are not involved
here.
So much for the merits of this case.
Isupposed when ] suggested that such q
state of affairs existed, and that had
in my possession documentary evi-
dence to establish each statement that
l have made, that you wouldagree with
me that the ends OF justice would not
he subserved by Our assisting in the
qualification OF the spirit of revenge III
which this former son-in-law appeared
to me, and still appears, to have enter,
ed upon a prosecution OF an alleged
offence with respect to which neither
he nor any one associated with him
ever offered a word of complaint fol
more than six years.
L still hope your Excellency will
agree with me after you have read this
letter.
Here follows a detailed account oi
the movements of Skiles from the
time of the purchase until the time oI
the requisition, which goes to show
that he did not leave the State, OF
rather revisited the State several times
after the purchase.
Even, therefore, il it be true that thf
merits of the case should not be con
sidered by the Executive to whom 6
requisition is presented, in any in
stance, even where facts come to his
knowledge that lead him to believe that
the Executive issuing the requisitior
has been misled, as was the case in this
instance, and all have said in that re-
spect should therefore have to be dis
regarded, still it is unquestionably bott
my right and my duty to determine
whether or not a party sought to be
extradited is in fact, as alleged, fugi
tive from justice, and it is both my
right and my duty, if am of the opin
ion he is not fugitive from justice, tC
refuse to issue my warrant, as do i.
this instance, without, however, l de
sire to say again, intending to show
any disrespect whatever to either YOU
Excellency or your process, but be
cause to do so is, in my judgment, my
duty in the premises.
j have the honor to be, very respect
fully, your obedient servant,
J. b. FORAKER,
Governor of Ohio.